Cargando…
Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment
Only a small proportion of pharmaceuticals available for commercial use have been monitored in the aquatic environment, and even less is known about the effects on organisms. With thousands of pharmaceuticals in use, it is not feasible to monitor or assess the effects of all of these compounds. Prio...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6513794/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30515684 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3834-9 |
_version_ | 1783417762888024064 |
---|---|
author | Letsinger, Sarah Kay, Paul |
author_facet | Letsinger, Sarah Kay, Paul |
author_sort | Letsinger, Sarah |
collection | PubMed |
description | Only a small proportion of pharmaceuticals available for commercial use have been monitored in the aquatic environment, and even less is known about the effects on organisms. With thousands of pharmaceuticals in use, it is not feasible to monitor or assess the effects of all of these compounds. Prioritisation schemes allow the ranking of pharmaceuticals based on their potential as environmental contaminants, allowing resources to be appropriately used on those which are most likely to enter the environment and cause greatest harm. Many different types of prioritisation schemes exist in the literature and those utilising predicted environmental concentrations (PECs), the fish plasma model (FPM), critical environmental concentrations (CECs) and acute ecotoxicological data were assessed in the current study using the 50 most prescribed drugs in the UK. PECs were found to be overestimates of mean measured environmental concentrations but mainly underestimations of maximum concentrations. Acute ecological data identified different compounds of concern to the other effects assessments although the FPM and CECs methods were more conservative. These schemes highlighted antidepressants, lipid regulators, antibiotics, antihypertensive compounds and ibuprofen as priority compounds for further study and regulation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11356-018-3834-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6513794 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65137942019-05-28 Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment Letsinger, Sarah Kay, Paul Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Research Article Only a small proportion of pharmaceuticals available for commercial use have been monitored in the aquatic environment, and even less is known about the effects on organisms. With thousands of pharmaceuticals in use, it is not feasible to monitor or assess the effects of all of these compounds. Prioritisation schemes allow the ranking of pharmaceuticals based on their potential as environmental contaminants, allowing resources to be appropriately used on those which are most likely to enter the environment and cause greatest harm. Many different types of prioritisation schemes exist in the literature and those utilising predicted environmental concentrations (PECs), the fish plasma model (FPM), critical environmental concentrations (CECs) and acute ecotoxicological data were assessed in the current study using the 50 most prescribed drugs in the UK. PECs were found to be overestimates of mean measured environmental concentrations but mainly underestimations of maximum concentrations. Acute ecological data identified different compounds of concern to the other effects assessments although the FPM and CECs methods were more conservative. These schemes highlighted antidepressants, lipid regulators, antibiotics, antihypertensive compounds and ibuprofen as priority compounds for further study and regulation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11356-018-3834-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018-12-04 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6513794/ /pubmed/30515684 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3834-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Letsinger, Sarah Kay, Paul Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title | Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title_full | Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title_short | Comparison of Prioritisation Schemes for Human Pharmaceuticals in the Aquatic Environment |
title_sort | comparison of prioritisation schemes for human pharmaceuticals in the aquatic environment |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6513794/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30515684 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3834-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT letsingersarah comparisonofprioritisationschemesforhumanpharmaceuticalsintheaquaticenvironment AT kaypaul comparisonofprioritisationschemesforhumanpharmaceuticalsintheaquaticenvironment |